99-18481. Technical Correction to Partial Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule, ``Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Reconsideration of Petition Criteria and Incorporation of Montreal Protocol Decisions''  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 21, 1999)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 39040-39041]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-18481]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 82
    
    [AD-FRL-6400-9]
    
    
    Technical Correction to Partial Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule, 
    ``Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Reconsideration of Petition 
    Criteria and Incorporation of Montreal Protocol Decisions''
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Final rule, technical correction.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This technical action corrects two typographical errors in the 
    October 5, 1998, partial withdrawal of a direct final rule (63 FR 
    53290). The errors are in the CFR citations referring to the Part 
    affected by that paragraph. 40 CFR 80.4 was printed instead of 40 CFR 
    82.4, the part of the Code which addresses stratospheric ozone 
    protection.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: July 21, 1999.
    
    ADDRESSES: Comments and materials supporting the rulemaking are 
    contained in Public Docket No. A-92-13. The docket is available for 
    public inspection and copying between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday 
    through Friday, at the EPA's Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
    Center, Waterside Mall, Room M-1500, first floor, 401 M Street SW, 
    Washington, DC 20460, or by calling 202/260-7548 or 260-7549. A 
    reasonable fee may be charged for copying.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Land, U.S. Environmental 
    Protection Agency, Program Implementation Branch, Stratospheric 
    Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, 6205J 401 M 
    Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, 202/564-9185.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    I. Background
    
        On August 4, 1998, EPA promulgated a direct final rule consisting 
    of a variety of amendments to the accelerated phaseout regulation, 
    intended to: reflect changes in U.S. obligations under the Montreal 
    Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol); ensure 
    compliance through the petition system for importation of used ozone-
    depleting substances; and change various requirements to ease the 
    burden on affected companies. EPA received numerous comments on various 
    sections of the rule. Where adverse comments were received, EPA 
    withdrew those specific provisions, proposed the withdrawn provisions, 
    and will ultimately promulgate a final rule that addresses the 
    provisions. The Federal Register notice withdrawing the provisions was 
    published on October 5, 1998, through a Partial Withdrawal of Direct 
    Final Rule.
    
    II. Correction to 63 FR 53290
    
        In the October 5, 1998 withdrawal, 63 FR 53290, paragraphs (6) and 
    (7) under the section entitled, Dates, the Code of Federal Regulations 
    (CFR) cite is incorrectly published as 40 CFR 80.4. The numbers after 
    ``CFR'' indicate the part of the Code of Federal Regulations where the 
    regulation can be found. The corrected part is 82.4 in both (6) and 
    (7).
    
    [[Page 39041]]
    
    Therefore, the corrected version should read:
        ``(6) The addition of paragraph (t)(3) in newly designated 40 CFR 
    82.4(t).
        (7) The addition of paragraph (u)(3) in newly designated 40 CFR 
    82.4 (u).''
    
    III. Administrative Requirements
    
    A. Good Cause Finding
    
        By promulgating these technical corrections directly as a final 
    rule, the EPA is foregoing an opportunity for public comment on a 
    notice of proposed rulemaking Section 553(b) of title 5 of the United 
    States Code and section 307(b) of the CAA permit an agency to forego 
    notice and comment when ``the agency for good cause finds (and 
    incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefore in 
    the rules issues) that notice and public procedure thereon are 
    impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' The 
    EPA finds that notice and comment regarding these minor technical 
    corrections are unnecessary due to their noncontroversial nature and 
    because they do not substantively change the requirements of the 
    partial withdrawal, the direct final amendment from which the 
    provisions were withdrawn, or the accelerated phaseout regulation for 
    which the amendments are intended, once promulgated. The EPA finds that 
    this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) for a determination 
    that the issuance of a notice of proposed rulemaking is unnecessary.
    
    B. Executive Orders 12866, 13045, 13083, 13084, Unfunded Mandates 
    Reform Act, Regulatory Flexibility Act, and Administrative Procedure 
    Act
    
        Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
    action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not 
    subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. In addition, 
    this action does not impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded 
    mandate, or impose any significant or unique impact on small 
    governments as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
    (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not require prior consultation 
    with State, local, and tribal government officials as specified by 
    Executive Order 12875 (58 FR 58093, October 28, 1993) or Executive 
    Order 13084 (63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998), or involve special 
    consideration of environmental justice related issues as required by 
    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Because this 
    action is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the 
    Administrative Procedure Act or any other statue, it is not subject to 
    the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
    (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This rule also is not subject to Executive 
    Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because EPA interprets E.O. 
    13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that are based on 
    health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 
    5-501 of the Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This 
    rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not establish an 
    environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.
        The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
    Small Business Regulatory Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that 
    before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must 
    submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House 
    of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. 
    Section 808 allows the issuing agency to make a good cause finding that 
    notice and public procedure is impracticable, unnecessary or contrary 
    to the public's interest. This determination must be supported by a 
    brief statement, 5 U.S.C. 802(2). As stated previously, EPA has made 
    such a good cause finding, including the reasons therefor, and 
    established an effective date of April 26, 1999. EPA will submit a 
    report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. 
    Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General 
    of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal 
    Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
    804(2).
    
    C. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    
        Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
    Act of 1995 (the NTTAA), Pub. L. 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
    note), directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
    regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
    applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
    are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
    sampling procedures, business practices, etc.) That are developed or 
    adopted by voluntary consensus standard bodies. The NTTAA requires the 
    EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency 
    decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus 
    standards.
        This regulatory action makes technical corrections to errors in 
    citation and does not involve any technical standards that would 
    require the Agency to consider voluntary consensus standards pursuant 
    to section 12(d) of the NTTAA.
    
    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
    
        Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
    Air pollution control, Chemicals, Chlorofluorocarbons, Exports, 
    Hydrochlorofluorocarbons, Imports, Ozone layer, Reporting and 
    recordkeeping requirements.
    
        Dated: July 10, 1999.
    Robert Perciasepe,
    Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation.
    [FR Doc. 99-18481 Filed 7-20-99; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
7/21/1999
Published:
07/21/1999
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule, technical correction.
Document Number:
99-18481
Dates:
July 21, 1999.
Pages:
39040-39041 (2 pages)
Docket Numbers:
AD-FRL-6400-9
PDF File:
99-18481.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 82